1. Tools for Self-Determination Special Management Area Boundary Study January 9, 2008

2. Outline of Presentation Purpose of the SMA –HRS 205A –SMA Guidelines Intent of permitting system –Regulatory control –Local input and participation Boundary setting –Historical context –Present use & enforcement Study –Methods –Analysis –Results Ecological gradients –Site specific recommendations –Next steps Implementation Considerations

3. The Planning Framework General Plan & Community Plans (Ch 2.80B, MCC) General Plan 1990 Molokai Community Plan MoPC REVIEW: Community Plan Amendments (CPA) State Constitution Hawaii State Planning Act (Ch 226, HRS) Charter 2002 State County MoPC Land Use Commission (Ch 205, HRS) District Boundary Amendment Special Use Permits >15 acres yes MoPC REVIEW: <15 acres (DBA) Special Use Permit (SUP1 & 2) no LUC Zoning (Ch 46, HRS) Zoning (Title 19, MCC) Comprehensive Zoning (Ch 19.04, MCC) Interim Zoning (Ch 19.02, MCC) MoPC REVIEW: Change in Zoning (CIZ) Conditional Permit (CP) County Special Use Permit (CUP) Planned Developments (PD1-3) Project Districts (PH1-2) Accessory Use Permit (ACC) Bed & Breakfast (BB2-3) Country Town Business CTB) Off-Site Parking (OSP) Shoreline Setback Rules (Ch 12-303, MoPC) MoPC REVIEW: SMA Permit (SM1 & SM6) SS Variances (SSV) Environmental Impact Statements (Ch 343, HRS) MoPC REVIEW: EA Docs EIS Docs Special Management Area Rules (Ch 12-302, MoPC) Coastal Zone Management (Ch 205A, HRS)

4. Purpose of the SMA HRS 205A - CZMA –Actions and activities within the SMA must be consistent with the law SMA Guidelines –Assures that allowable uses are designed and carried out in conformance with CZMA Nexus Ex: FEMA standards allow a structure to withstand flood water inundation, but do not mitigate the impact of that structure on coastal resources or protect them septic wastewater or chlorinated pool water <> fishpond and aquatic species

5. Intent of the Permitting System Regulatory Control –Applies to ‘Developments’ or those activities with the potential to have an adverse impact on specified coastal resources (i.e. nexus) –Development may occur when adverse impacts are avoided, minimized, mitigated or outweighed by a compelling public interest –Local decision making and public participation

6. Boundary Setting Historical context –1975 interim boundary, 1977 final boundary –1979 subdivision ordinance passed (Papohaku dune) In response to tremendous growth in oceanfront homes and resorts, the SMA permit was viewed as the first locally-based regulatory tool. Present Situations exist where there is no clear nexus or connection between the proposed action or activity and its impact on coastal resources Ex: conditions requiring sidewalks for commercial establishments Other situations exist where proposed actions which potentially impact coastal resources are not well-regulated Ex: agricultural use of an invasive plant species near Papohaku Dune

7. Boundary Review Impetus for SMA Boundary Study –Community Plan expresses community’s desire to study boundary delineation –Impacts on fishponds –Desire for greater self-determination and local regulatory control –Lack of on-island enforcement personnel –Lack of financial support for enforcement efforts (transit, time, equipment)

8. SMA Boundary Study, Phase I Methods Described measures that are indicative of HRS 205A Objectives and Policies, SMA Guidelines and NOAA Performance Measures Reviewed all Moloka’i SMA files from the TMK project folders Analysis Related the conditions imposed to the above coastal resource policies Recognized those conditions which avoided, mitigated, or minimized adverse impacts to coastal resources Results In general conditions did not have a connection to coastal resources For example Take’s Store was greatly enhanced by conditions related to architectural design –Kaunakakai is subject to Country Town Business District Design Standards –Thus such a standard could be imposed through a Community Plan determination

9. SMA Boundary Study, Phase II Map Study –Acquired maps of Flood zone, tsunami inundation, wetlands, fishponds, Conservation Areas, underlying State Land Use Area, beaches, dunes, roads, streams and drainages. –Identified SMA boundaries > 300 ft from shoreline Field Study –Determined if the boundary incorporated the ecological resources described above Results –Site specific expansion and/or contraction recommendations based on field observation, nexus with identified coastal resources, and Phase I results

10. Recommendations - Papohaku Dunes Kepuhi Bay Papohaku Beach Kahaiawa Pt Protect scenic vista of pu’u

11. Recommendations - Kaunakakai Kaunakakai Kamiloloa

12. Recommendations – East End Ali ‘ i Fishpond Kamiloloa Kawela Kanukunukauawa

13. Recommendations – East End Fishponds Kamalo Mapulehu ‘Ualapu ‘ e

14. Ecological Gradients Site specific recommendations –Expand at Papohaku Dunes –Contact rural land mauka of Kawakiu Bay –Contract Kaunakakai Town –Expand where flood zone exceeds current SMA boundary (ex. East End) –Ensure land mauka of fishponds are protected Recommended next steps –Geo-referenced maps from Long Range Division –Updated flood inundation areas from FEMA –Overlays with SMA Boundary

15. Implementation Considerations Enforcement Existing laws regarding grading, stream alteration and building should be fully implemented Regulatory Control General and Community Plan updates have force of law, require infrastructure concurrency, incorporate financial and budgetary considerations and apply to the island as a whole. As such, it is an innovative mechanism for self-determination of growth on Moloka’i